Jump to content
IGNORED

World Cup Qatar 2022 - Desert Strike

Boothjan

By Boothjan
in Sport

 Share

Recommended Posts

ChewMagma

ChewMagma

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, ucci said:

Some of the comments made by the bourgeois on twitter about footy make me want to remove myself from this beautiful game. Sign of the times I suppose. 

 

Deep down they believe that getting excited about English football is still gauche and despise enthusiasm and optimism in that peculiarly British upper middle class way. They'd rather the chaos of earlier eras - sells more papers, columns, and books. Pay them no mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loik V credern

Loik V credern

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Angles Morts said:

Was round a mates house just now and he was still quite down about last night. He's really in football, far more than me, and reckons that was the best chance we'll have in his lifetime, and he's younger than me. Luckily he managed to talk me round, now I'm miserable too.

 

I don't get the 'best chance' thing. In his lifetime, really? Why? Euro 2020 because it was a home tournament and the run was favourable and being one up in a final within a few minutes counts as a chance. Is the chance this year because after France any usual top teams aren't in the way or because the England squad has peaked? 

 

I'm not sure Spain's, Portugal's, Brazil's setups will necessarily think they got a lot wrong (unlike Belgium and Germany where it's a genuine rebuild), they might be as strong in 4 years as they were here, that is not as strong as people expected, they're all underachieving and not quite getting there as England aren't. 

 

If the whole atmosphere in the England setup has changed I don't see why they'd be any regression. That will be Southgate's biggest contribution and one that will be long lasting surely. 

 

I saw a tweet that again to me had that desperation I dislike so much, a list of players with 'In 4 years all these players will be in their prime', as in: this is it the final chance. We have to assume the changes to academies will keep producing technically gifted players. The list included Harvey Elliot who I rate highly (although again another attacking midfielder deployed wide..) and forgot all about. 

 

The 2019 election is what a chance looks like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fry Crayola

Fry Crayola

Posted
Posted

Recently, Jonathan Wilson proposed retaining a 32-team World Cup, but a globalised final round of qualifying, in order to achieve the goal of giving continents other than Europe and South America a better crack at participation in the finals. In his suggestion, there'd be no spaces allocated to any confederation, instead the final round of qualifying is 20 groups of 4 teams, playing a double round-robin, with the winners heading to the finals and the runners up progressing to a playoff. Adjust the numbers according to the number of host countries qualifying automatically.

 

It's an interesting idea (and definitely a better proposal than either 3-team groups or letting third place finishers progress) but for me, one of the great things about the World Cup is that it guarantees participation from (almost) all confederations on the biggest stage. A final qualifying stage somewhat diminishes that if you end up with every Asian team, say, getting knocked out before it's even begun.

 

(The fantasy draw at the end, as it happens, once again sees Ireland unable to catch a fucking break).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ork1927

Ork1927

Posted
Posted

I think - as the 48 team Word Cup appears set in stone then the 16 3rd place teams that get knocked out should go into a World 'Trophy' knockout - scrap the 3rd/4th place game in the World Cup and play the trophy final in its place the day before the final.  That way - all the qualifying teams still get 3 games as opposed to 2.

 

Not the best idea I know, but one of the main problems with this 48 team thing is team potentially get to the World Cup - play the first 2 games and get knocked out even if they don't lose both games while sitting in their hotel watching the other two teams play the third group game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Boothjan

Boothjan

Posted
  • Author
  • Popular Post
Posted

I've calmed down a bit now - and I've read a lot of post mortems from Saturday, and I simply disagree with a lot of them.

 

And I'm pleased that I do - I genuinely feel that it's very, very simple to summarise: we were unlucky, we played well, we'd have won on another day and France are a decent side.

 

It's been a good tournament for England despite frustration and heartache from leaving at the quarter final stage.  We played some superb football, scored a bagful of goals, saw some excellent performances and with the likes of Bellingham, Saka, Foden all impressing, the future looks bright for us.

 

Trying to micro-analyse everything isn't healthy when I really don't think there are any alarming issues with the setup, the tactics, the personnel, the attitude.

 

It's not 'the best chance we'll ever have' when we have so many superb young players either in the side already or coming through the ranks.

 

I hope Southgate stays on.  He's doing well, he conducts himself superbly, is very likeable and respectful and I can't think of anyone who could realistically take over who would be an improvement.

22
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loik V credern

Loik V credern

Posted
Posted

As pundits are saying, the two best coaches in the world cup, Flick and Enrique underachieved, whereas the Morocco coach who has been in the job for a few months has overachieved. Scaloni was just a caretaker manager for Argentina but did well and stayed longer. 

 

I looked at the 2022 guardian young talent at premier league clubs list to see of any midfielders that might emerge even if there is a 5% chance they will breakthrough into their first teams and impress. Archie Gray at Leeds looks genuinely good to me, but then most young talent to me does. If they have a strong command of the ball under pressure. 

 

They were saying on football weekly if we have any good midfielder who likes getting forward we turn them into a no.10, citing Bellingham which I don't get really. Jasob Ramsey is another talent but seems like he's best with late runs and finishing than controlling the middle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timmo

Timmo

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Boothjan said:

I've calmed down a bit now - and I've read a lot of post mortems from Saturday, and I simply disagree with a lot of them.

 

And I'm pleased that I do - I genuinely feel that it's very, very simple to summarise: we were unlucky, we played well, we'd have won on another day and France are a decent side.

 

It's been a good tournament for England despite frustration and heartache from leaving at the quarter final stage.  We played some superb football, scored a bagful of goals, saw some excellent performances and with the likes of Bellingham, Saka, Foden all impressing, the future looks bright for us.

 

Trying to micro-analyse everything isn't healthy when I really don't think there are any alarming issues with the setup, the tactics, the personnel, the attitude.

 

It's not 'the best chance we'll ever have' when we have so many superb young players either in the side already or coming through the ranks.

 

I hope Southgate stays on.  He's doing well, he conducts himself superbly, is very likeable and respectful and I can't think of anyone who could realistically take over who would be an improvement.


Spot on.

 

Look at Pep and the Champions League. Been years since he won it despite usually having the best team, and no one (sane) questions his ability or their ability to have won it. This is cup football. 

4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gabe

Gabe

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Timmo said:


Spot on.

 

Look at Pep and the Champions League. Been years since he won it despite usually having the best team, and no one (sane) questions his ability or their ability to have won it. This is cup football. 

Didn't pretty much everybody question his team selection for the final vs Chelsea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timmo

Timmo

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Gabe said:

Didn't pretty much everybody question his team selection for the final vs Chelsea?


Many did, but I don’t think Chelsea were losing that day, they played to perfection. I also don’t think it was justified. Tuchel had his number that season and he’d already tried Rodri twice, losing both times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Plissken

Plissken

Posted
Posted

I'm with @Boothjan, there's a lot of people using the clarity of hindsight to predict what they should have done, and ultimately would you have had the balls in that moment to tell Kane that he wasn't taking that penalty?

 

Reminds me of a story I heard about a guy who analysed (ice) hockey on Twitter and was so good at it he got a job at an NHL team.  He sat in the press box at his first game and immediately on the final buzzer the GM of the team came over and asked him for his instant analysis on the performance.

 

"Er..I.."

"Lot harder without replays, isn't it?  *winks*"

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
glb

glb

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Plissken said:

I'm with @Boothjan, there's a lot of people using the clarity of hindsight to predict what they should have done, and ultimately would you have had the balls in that moment to tell Kane that he wasn't taking that penalty?

 

Reminds me of a story I heard about a guy who analysed (ice) hockey on Twitter and was so good at it he got a job at an NHL team.  He sat in the press box at his first game and immediately on the final buzzer the GM of the team came over and asked him for his instant analysis on the performance.

 

"Er..I.."

"Lot harder without replays, isn't it?  *winks*"

 

Did the hockey team install a replay monitor so he could do the job he'd been hired to do properly?

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fry Crayola

Fry Crayola

Posted
Posted

Though I haven't watched them, I understand England have played well in this tournament, and surpassed their performances in the final match from the last two tournaments. The main thing is, they're in the mix and I don't think you can really ask for anything more than that. Like Timmo says, it's cup football. Sometimes, the dice just don't fall your way, but you get back up and be in the mix the next time, and you'll eventually get the lucky rolls.

 

All the manager, the FA, the coaches, the infrastructure can really do is keep setting up the team and delivering the best possible conditions within their control. You could overanalyse any particular exit until the cows come home, and you can learn from them, but you can't turn back time with ifs and maybes. Just keep going.

 

England will win a major tournament again. I just hope it's not before Ireland qualify for one.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fry Crayola

Fry Crayola

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ork1927 said:

play the first 2 games and get knocked out even if they don't lose both games while sitting in their hotel watching the other two teams play the third group game.

 

Yep, that's an issue. With a four-team group, if you draw one of your first two games you're generally still in with some chance of progressing and have some say in your own fate, not to mention have something to take your mind off things when the other match of importance is played out. With a three team group, it's just nail-biting and hoping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
glb

glb

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Plissken said:

 

Yes, it was just a little joke on the GMs part.

 

Phew! I like jokes.

 

43 minutes ago, Fry Crayola said:

 

Yep, that's an issue. With a four-team group, if you draw one of your first two games you're generally still in with some chance of progressing and have some say in your own fate, not to mention have something to take your mind off things when the other match of importance is played out. With a three team group, it's just nail-biting and hoping.

 

That also speaks to the shiteness of one team potentially having an unfair advantage, and being the kingmaker of the group depending on how the fixtures fall. If 'Team C' watches 'Team A' and 'Team B' draw the opening game, Team C can adjust accordingly. Obviously sides can't just turn up and win, but I would bet decent money (52p) that there would be plenty of sides that would be fine with a more definitive idea of what's needed going into a game. Plus, if Team C were to beat Team A in their game, Team A has to watch on knowing Team B and Team C could do arrange a biscotto in the final group match to ensure they both progress.

 

I'd bet a further 12p that between now and the time 2026 is drawn, FIFA will look at the final group stages of this World Cup and opt for four team groups. Third place sides progressing isn't ideal, but would be prone to less shenanigans than three team groups. And it's another way for Scotland to exit a World Cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marlowe

Marlowe

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Plissken said:

I'm with @Boothjan, there's a lot of people using the clarity of hindsight to predict what they should have done, and ultimately would you have had the balls in that moment to tell Kane that he wasn't taking that penalty?

 

 

 

This is the problem for me with most sports punditry. We know that performances, tactical decisions, substitutions etc. can still all be excellent but the result not go your way. Yet pundits constantly analyse back from the outcome.

 

France win and therefore we admire how "clinical and "ruthless" they are, despite them scoring from a low % long range hit and a misdirected deflected header off Harry Maguire's shoulder.

 

Even Lee Dixon was at this during the game, acting as if the first half performance was poor despite England having more possession, creating the better chances and being on the wrong end of contentious refereeing decisions, one of which directly led to their goal.

 

Aside from penalty misses, another common one is when a player gets sent off for a second yellow, the manager will always be lambasted for not having taken the player off earlier, regardless of how that might have compromised the team performance and tactical set up.

 

Something like Poker has a far better level of analysis as the level of luck is quantifiable to a large extent, everyone can accept that what was the best play in any situation may not end up as the winning one.

 

My take away from the game was that England defended solidly, dominated midfield, nullified France's best player and top scorer of this tournament, and created enough chances to win the game. Something I can't recall us ever having done in my lifetime in a major tournament against an in form top team. The difference was Kane's finishing on the day (not just with the pen but his first half chance) vs. their luck with Giroud's finish.

5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Plissken

Plissken

Posted
Posted

Ultimately, football is a game of small margins and England were on the wrong side of those small margins.  Can't remember if I've said this here already, but the one thing that I would say is that France played the ref better.  He wasn't going to whistle for a foul if he thought the fouled player exaggerated at all.  France seemed to figure this out and England didn't.  The French were a little bit more streetwise but ultimately those moments tipped the game against England and well, that's football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept